If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   FAA to allow use of personal electronic devices in all phases of flight, also allowed to challenge the Captain to top your Angry Birds and Candy Crush scores   (nbcnews.com) divider line 44
    More: Cool, Angry Birds, Federal Aviation Administration, flights, Skymall  
•       •       •

2015 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Oct 2013 at 1:12 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



44 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-10-31 12:53:36 PM  
Using electronic devices on planes?  There's an app(roval) for that!

/'Bout friggin' time
 
2013-10-31 01:04:24 PM  
I think I'd rather be able to see that the Captain kicks ass at Flight Control, thank you very much...
 
2013-10-31 01:13:59 PM  
The article I read was full of equivocation. The newer planes have much better shielding, so radio frequencies are as big an issue...

Not a chance in the world they admit the ban was technologically clueless bullshiat.
 
2013-10-31 01:14:22 PM  
So all this time ...
 
2013-10-31 01:16:45 PM  
So the FAA now says such devices have been safe all along?  What's next, the TSA admits checkpoints are theaters?
 
2013-10-31 01:19:32 PM  
Yeah, I'll finally be able to play with my portable tesla coil and jacob's ladder during flights.
 
2013-10-31 01:20:35 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: So all this time ...


You know how many fark threads there have been where people argued "but there is a chance it could crash the plane!"?

Idiots.
 
2013-10-31 01:23:13 PM  
I TOLD you I was hardcore!!!
 
2013-10-31 01:23:37 PM  
So, this is more likely to happen now?

pbs.twimg.com
 
2013-10-31 01:23:38 PM  
More so then interference, it's the people not paying attention/headphones etc that worries flight attendants and airline lawyers.  In the event of an emergency, you want everyone able to hear instructions and commands.  Someone with earphones on might not hear that.  There's also the issue of everything being stowed away to clear the exit lanes.  Laptop cases, backpacks, etc, not to mention laptops themselves, as the article points out, could lead to clutter.  One passenger trips during an evacuation, and blocks the aisle (burning passengers) or best case scenario simply gets trampled to death.

I can see why the FAA is leaving it up to carriers.  And I don't understand why people are so annoyed about 5 minutes of flight without a PED, on takeoff and on landing.  Who cares?  The pilots are not allowed to have casual conversations below 10,000 ft because they are focused on the landing.  Why shouldn't the passengers be alert for those phases of flight as well?
 
2013-10-31 01:25:44 PM  
cdn2.www.babble.com

I TOLD you I was hardcore!!

/now with hotlinky goodness
 
2013-10-31 01:26:58 PM  

tiiger: The pilots are not allowed to have casual conversations below 10,000 ft because they are focused on the landing.  Why shouldn't the passengers be alert for those phases of flight as well?


Because we aren't LANDING THE FARKING PLANE!
 
2013-10-31 01:29:30 PM  
Should be interesting the first time there's a problem and someone gets beaned with someone else's iPad. Oh, well, lets the carriers sort it out.

/only fly once (round-trip) a year. Have fun.
 
2013-10-31 01:30:16 PM  
^LET
 
2013-10-31 01:36:03 PM  
Headphones a distraction to some during an emergency?  That's no problem, I can shove bodies out of my way when I'm trying to exit a burning aircraft.  They can stay and listen to iTunes in the flames.
 
2013-10-31 01:37:15 PM  
It's not like folks weren't leaving them on anyway.
 
2013-10-31 01:50:57 PM  

tiiger: More so then interference, it's the people bla-blah, bla-blah.  In the event of an emergency, bla bla bla.  Someone with earphones bla-bla, let's get through all this boring stuff so we can get to the (burning passengers) or best case scenario simply gets trampled to death.


FTF the last WN flight I took

/ She actually did the whole safety spiel properly
// But she was saying what we were all thinking
 
2013-10-31 01:57:09 PM  
i.imgur.com

Finally.
 
2013-10-31 01:57:41 PM  

Mad Scientist: Headphones a distraction to some during an emergency?  That's no problem, I can shove bodies out of my way when I'm trying to exit a burning aircraft.  They can stay and listen to iTunes in the flames.


If you're flammible and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit.

/Mitch

//You might miss your sky waitress offering you 1/3rd of a coke because you've got headphones in, but being upside down in a cornfield in a smoke filled cabin tends to get people's atttention.
 
2013-10-31 02:02:39 PM  

rkiller1: So the FAA now says such devices have been safe all along?  What's next, the TSA admits checkpoints are theaters?


The TSA has said that. Somewhat inadvertently. There was a lawsuit against them, and documents, including secret ones, were involved in the filing. There was a public version with stuff blacked out, as well as a classified filing with all the info there. Only trouble is a clerk "accidentally" posted the classified version publicly along with the blacked out version, and lo and behold, it turns out the TSA's own threat assessments have determined that there's essentially no risk of another airline hijacking again. They cited secure cockpit doors and passenger willingness to take on attackers.

And they thought that that was sensitive information the public wasn't entitled to know, which is revealing in itself.
 
2013-10-31 02:03:46 PM  
So Delta is going to be first out of the gate with this? Does this mean I have to like them again?

I understand the variety of reasons for the policy, and I am not looking forward to the new fights - "what's the difference between my 17" laptop and his iPod?"

/don't fly as much as I used to
//new office is directly under a major airport flight path
 
2013-10-31 02:08:35 PM  

Unobtanium: So Delta is going to be first out of the gate with this? Does this mean I have to like them again?


No, because fark the Atlanta airport.
 
2013-10-31 02:11:06 PM  
You mean I can crank up my music to drown out the screechy babies during takeoff and landing? Yes, please!
 
2013-10-31 02:16:11 PM  

jst3p: HotIgneous Intruder: So all this time ...

You know how many fark threads there have been where people argued "but there is a chance it could crash the plane!"?

Idiots.


With devices that transmit there really is a chance of messing something up.

However it has more to do with messing up the base stations for cell phones then the airplanes.

The FCC is actually the main reason for banning cell phones in flight.
 
2013-10-31 02:24:35 PM  

tiiger: More so then interference, it's the people not paying attention/headphones etc that worries flight attendants and airline lawyers.  In the event of an emergency, you want everyone able to hear instructions and commands.  Someone with earphones on might not hear that.  There's also the issue of everything being stowed away to clear the exit lanes.  Laptop cases, backpacks, etc, not to mention laptops themselves, as the article points out, could lead to clutter.  One passenger trips during an evacuation, and blocks the aisle (burning passengers) or best case scenario simply gets trampled to death.

I can see why the FAA is leaving it up to carriers.  And I don't understand why people are so annoyed about 5 minutes of flight without a PED, on takeoff and on landing.  Who cares?  The pilots are not allowed to have casual conversations below 10,000 ft because they are focused on the landing.  Why shouldn't the passengers be alert for those phases of flight as well?


Don't forget any unsecured items can become projectiles.
 
2013-10-31 02:31:06 PM  
I'm more of a Cut The Rope & Slice It guy.

fc09.deviantart.net

// His name is 'Om Nom' and he eats candy. As a farker, how could you not love that?
 
2013-10-31 02:32:07 PM  

tiiger: The pilots are not allowed to have casual conversations below 10,000 ft because they are focused on the landing.  Why shouldn't the passengers be alert for those phases of flight as well?


Because we aren't flying the plane?

Is this a trick question?
 
2013-10-31 02:32:25 PM  

lordargent: I'm more of a Cut The Rope & Slice It guy.

[fc09.deviantart.net image 850x637]

// His name is 'Om Nom' and he eats candy. As a farker, how could you not love that?


Plus he has kind of a trollish look to him, right up your ally.
 
2013-10-31 02:37:26 PM  
i.imgur.com

/q&d
 
2013-10-31 02:40:49 PM  

mediablitz: The article I read was full of equivocation. The newer planes have much better shielding, so radio frequencies are as big an issue...

Not a chance in the world they admit the ban was technologically clueless bullshiat.


They were never an issue. Look up inverse square law. That device sitting 25 feet back is not a problem.
 
2013-10-31 02:41:01 PM  

jst3p: tiiger: The pilots are not allowed to have casual conversations below 10,000 ft because they are focused on the landing.  Why shouldn't the passengers be alert for those phases of flight as well?

Because we aren't LANDING THE FARKING PLANE!


Yup. It's all business up front below 10,000 ft. Nothing but laser like focus....
 
2013-10-31 02:54:19 PM  

SurfaceTension:
Don't forget any unsecured items can become projectiles.

That's a huge one.  There's a debate here in Canada because of a recent crash where a mother was holding her baby during the incident.  There has long been a belief that this was secure, and bracing with the child would be safe.  Unfortunately, as many of us in the industry knew, it wasn't safe.  A 10lb kid under deceleration loads becomes an 80~120 lb force trying to leave your arms, or worse, flying through the cabin at someone's neck.  A mother's love isn't going to save the kid, or whatever it flies into.

And yes, the child died in the crash, very very sad.  It is prompting a review of inflight restraints for infants in Canada.

Shocktopus: tiiger: The pilots are not allowed to have casual conversations below 10,000 ft because they are focused on the landing.  Why shouldn't the passengers be alert for those phases of flight as well?
Because we aren't flying the plane?
Is this a trick question?


Not a trick question.  In the event of an emergency I don't trust some idiot with his headphones on or playing angrybirds to be fully aware of the situation, or to be able to react as quickly as someone who is looking out the window/focused on the landing.  In aircraft incidents, seconds count, and that momentary confusion could be the difference between life or death.  It's 10 minutes out of your life where you could put down the PDA/tablet etc.  It's really not asking all that much.  Unexpected things do happen, and I see no argument against a 'sterile cabin' below 10,000 feet other then someone wanting to play a game on a tablet, which just seems petty really.  I'm open to any other arguments about why people should be allowed to use their electronic devices/have unsecured items in their laps in a critical flight phase.
 
2013-10-31 02:58:57 PM  
iron_city_ap:
Yup. It's all business up front below 10,000 ft. Nothing but laser like focus....

It's in our company procedures, as well as Transport procedures for airline operators.  We do spot checks on CVRs and we do pull pilots off the flight line if they disobey the standing orders.  Safety is paramount, and we don't mess around at all when it comes to violations of national or internal safety measures.  Any and all approaches and departures, the flight crew is expected to keep idle chatter to a minimum, preferably none at all.  There's just too many dangers during the critical flight phase to risk adding more distractions in.

It's the same with checklists and FA crosschecks.  You follow the checklist, no exception.  You pull the checklist and physically put your finger on each item as you read it off.  The FAs must physically confirm on the cross check by touching the locking handles and screen connections.  Yes it is annoying, yes it seems overdramatic.  But it saves lives.
 
2013-10-31 03:05:52 PM  

tiiger: iron_city_ap:
Yup. It's all business up front below 10,000 ft. Nothing but laser like focus....

It's in our company procedures, as well as Transport procedures for airline operators.  We do spot checks on CVRs and we do pull pilots off the flight line if they disobey the standing orders.  Safety is paramount, and we don't mess around at all when it comes to violations of national or internal safety measures.  Any and all approaches and departures, the flight crew is expected to keep idle chatter to a minimum, preferably none at all.  There's just too many dangers during the critical flight phase to risk adding more distractions in.

It's the same with checklists and FA crosschecks.  You follow the checklist, no exception.  You pull the checklist and physically put your finger on each item as you read it off.  The FAs must physically confirm on the cross check by touching the locking handles and screen connections.  Yes it is annoying, yes it seems overdramatic.  But it saves lives.


They only randomly pull our DFDR data, but it can't be used for discipline. Nothing with the CVR unless there is an accident/incident. We will get called if we screw up, but not pulled off line. Now, if it becomes a regular thing, they will escalate and put a stop to it.
 
2013-10-31 03:54:45 PM  

jst3p: Because we aren't LANDING THE FARKING PLANE!


Imagine having your laptop on your lap in here:

media.npr.org

This is Asiana flight 204.  There was no prior warning of anything wrong.
 
2013-10-31 03:58:02 PM  
iron_city_ap:

They only randomly pull our DFDR data, but it can't be used for discipline. Nothing with the CVR unless there is an accident/incident. We will get called if we screw up, but not pulled off line. Now, if it becomes a regular thing, they will escalate and put a stop to it.

Yeah, it's basically a verbal, a verbal with the chief pilot, a written with the chief pilot, and a career review with the chief pilot and director of flying operations.  It's not an instant pull, but they do monitor for compliance.
 
2013-10-31 04:00:06 PM  
1. It is about time!! Nobody interrupts Neil Peart's Drum Solo, not even the FAA

2. People still play Angry Birds? and Candy Crush needs to go die in a fire, just like Farmville... People wonder why I never use Facebook.
 
2013-10-31 05:01:55 PM  
It's good that this issue was fixed before Al Qaeda realized all they needed to do to crash our airliners was to fire up a cell phone mid-flight.
 
2013-10-31 05:12:19 PM  

bighairyguy: Using electronic devices on planes?  There's an app(roval) for that!

/'Bout friggin' time


I submitted this about a month or two ago.
 
2013-10-31 05:33:35 PM  

haemaker: jst3p: Because we aren't LANDING THE FARKING PLANE!

Imagine having your laptop on your lap in here:

[media.npr.org image 850x477]

This is Asiana flight 204.  There was no prior warning of anything wrong.


My laptop is going to be a problem in that situation? Seriously, you are reaching.
 
2013-10-31 05:58:14 PM  
God forbid people go a few minutes without their precious devices.
 
2013-10-31 06:51:50 PM  

jst3p: haemaker: jst3p: Because we aren't LANDING THE FARKING PLANE!

Imagine having your laptop on your lap in here:

[media.npr.org image 850x477]

This is Asiana flight 204.  There was no prior warning of anything wrong.

My laptop is going to be a problem in that situation? Seriously, you are reaching.


Yep, how much force do you think it will have at impact going approx 120 mph?  Maybe it will harmlessly embed itself into the head or back of the passenger in front of you, maybe not, who knows?  Who cares? As long as you can catch the end of your movie...
 
2013-10-31 08:06:18 PM  

tiiger: More so then interference, it's the people not paying attention/headphones etc that worries flight attendants and airline lawyers.  In the event of an emergency, you want everyone able to hear instructions and commands.  Someone with earphones on might not hear that.  There's also the issue of everything being stowed away to clear the exit lanes.  Laptop cases, backpacks, etc, not to mention laptops themselves, as the article points out, could lead to clutter.  One passenger trips during an evacuation, and blocks the aisle (burning passengers) or best case scenario simply gets trampled to death.

I can see why the FAA is leaving it up to carriers.  And I don't understand why people are so annoyed about 5 minutes of flight without a PED, on takeoff and on landing.  Who cares?  The pilots are not allowed to have casual conversations below 10,000 ft because they are focused on the landing.  Why shouldn't the passengers be alert for those phases of flight as well?


Probably because the pilot is flying, I am just buckled into a seat far away from the flight controls?

When I'm flying the plane, I'm not messing around either.
 
2013-10-31 09:47:02 PM  
dilbert.com

/Oblig
//Hot, like Alice
///Original: Dilbert
 
Displayed 44 of 44 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report